On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:09:24PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > Gooping up poor innocent init.d scripts, and confusing our poor
> > innocent users, is a Bad Idea(tm). A separate set of scripts in a
> > separate directory, or possibly a list managed with some simple perl
> > tools, is much cleaner, and much less confusing.
> You call 3 extra lines (one if you write it right) "gooping"?!
As the old saying goes, it's not about size, it's about how you use
it. The init.d scripts are for starting and stopping daemons, not for
reporting on their linkage. Note that I didn't say "smaller", I said,
"cleaner" and "less confusing".
> So forcing them to add a complete script to a directory is less complex
> than adding a few lines to an already existing script?
It's certainly cleaner. And it makes it more obvious that we're
adding a whole new functionality. And it means that upstream init
files may not have to be patched.
> Having a directory with all these little scripts and people asking
> "What is /etc/nss-restart for?" is better for the users? IMO, your
> proposal is no different, no better and no simpler. Adding:
Adding this feature is going to cause people to ask questions, however
we do it. That's inevitable. And yes, my proposal is basically no
different, except that it provides a cleaner separation of
functionality, which is, IMO, a Very Good Thing. I'll gladly
sacrifice a tiny handful of inodes on the altar of clarity.
cheers
--
Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into
| this .signature file.
